[Filtered] Absolutely all info [ENG]
Machine translation, there WILL be inaccuracies.
Quoting someone’s words:
“They pulled off an investigation like it wasn’t a fucking joke to anyone.”
This entire situation escalated into a full-blown drama over practically nothing. A few gifs and short videos somehow led to a complete breakdown from at least one admin — Simon.
I was there. I saw it all firsthand.
Simon initially responded with something like:
“You’re wrong, I’m all clean and holy, a fucking saint. If you want truth — show your real selves first (main accounts).”
And in the very same breath, he suggests opening a dialogue.
But then — barely two minutes later — every alt account gets banned.
What was that all about?
You said you wanted to listen. To talk. But then you banned everyone before the conversation could even start. Instead of resolving anything, that move only made things worse and raised more questions.
Then a certain Google Form surfaced: [link partially redacted — to avoid spreading unverified allegations]
In this document, Simon complains about being removed from Aihasto moderation “for no reason.”
But people had been voicing concerns about the English moderation team's actions for quite a while, hadn’t they? Things like trying to ban standard Discord emojis. Cracking down on discussions in chats that were clearly labeled “all-topic.”
And when Simon got kicked, people celebrated in chat. If the community had truly wanted him to stay, the mood would’ve been outrage — not relief. But instead, familiar faces like Elnofar returned — and the atmosphere lightened. People were genuinely happy.
Mentions like “FreeNofar” or “Free Elnofar” triggered punishments — and those decisions came straight from the English moderation team.
Simon himself admitted to being the one in charge. If that’s the case, then he also holds responsibility for what happened.
Then came his exit (or removal), followed by this statement in the same document:
“I’m revoking access to the project applications.”
Why? Is this supposed to be some form of symbolic power play? It’s just a Google Form. Anyone can make one. The work doesn’t hinge on you.
And let’s also remember: Simon wasn’t even the one who organized the MISIDE x DDLC collaboration. That wasn’t his doing.
I’m genuinely frustrated — not because of what he did personally, but because the entire situation was handled so poorly. As someone with years of moderation experience across different servers, I can say this was the exact opposite of responsible action.
Why was Lilycvt dragged into this drama? He barely said anything. He didn’t seem to support Simon’s narrative at all.
“Lily was demoted without prior warning. Simon was removed immediately afterward due to his association with Lily, despite having managed the raid response. Toka cited ‘security concerns’ and potential sabotage, not individual misconduct.”
These things happen. And they don’t usually come out of nowhere. If someone’s removed, there’s usually a reason — even if it isn’t stated publicly.
“5. Reversal of Prior Bans: Zoey, Nofar, and Flintlock — all previously banned for sustained staff abuse and community disruption — were unbanned without team consultation shortly after.”
So what? If the community didn’t want them back, they wouldn’t have been unbanned. But when people started chanting Free Elnofar, your team jumped to suppress it immediately.
Simon and Lily’s removal? That had to have been discussed behind closed doors for a long time already. There’s no reason why someone would need to inform you directly before taking action. That’s just how leadership transitions work.
“I completely understand that the Discord server Aihasto is currently being led by a group of hypocrites and power abusers!”
You said that — while being in a position of power yourself, using it questionably. That kind of statement is self-defeating.
“Attached are screenshots that include: Toka the Head 'Shoulder' / Admin creating an NSFW channel and encouraging porn distribution. A user claiming they saw CP gifs in the 'cartridge' channel. Umeerai joking about CP and not caring it’s being circulated. Toka admitting there was CP art and sending screenshots. Asking people to stay quiet.”
That channel was private and not moderated per Discord’s own guidelines. As someone who was present — that kind of content was never there. These claims are not only false, but also dangerous and reckless to make.
The attached screenshots? They were cropped and lacking context. Anyone can make a situation look worse by trimming out key information. What was left barely says anything substantial at all.
You seemed to think you were exposing some great evil.
But the reality is — your own actions created more harm than good.
You couldn’t just let the situation settle. Instead, you chose the most dramatic, destructive path imaginable: spreading unverified accusations, silencing dissent, and trying to frame others as villains.
Also — Illidan and Toka weren’t even directly involved in that so-called “raid.” They were dragged into the mess as collateral damage, simply because they were part of the moderation infrastructure.
We needed verified accounts — so we used all the mod team's access. And yet you accused those people of lies without ever speaking to them directly.
Simon himself proposed negotiations — and then banned everyone moments later.
Why?
And after all that, you left the server and started sabotaging it from the outside.
You broke the submission form, and tried to make a dramatic exit while painting yourself as the “defender of truth.” But real leaders step down with dignity. They don’t try to burn the place down behind them.
The English chat is doing better now. People aren’t afraid of using emojis anymore. The atmosphere is calmer. Lighter. Less tense.
Simon, you banned reactions. How fragile must one be to feel threatened by a simple emoji?
The truth is — if someone can’t handle the role, they need to make space for those who can.
You called yourself a leader. But the actions said otherwise.
Next.
Attempted Disruption After Leaving
Following Simon’s departure from the moderation team, a number of actions were taken that appeared to be aimed at disrupting ongoing server operations. These included:
Breaking the Submission Infrastructure The submission form — the same Google Form linked in earlier communications — was intentionally disabled.
These actions contradicted the narrative presented by Simon and his associates, who positioned themselves as defenders of the server and advocates for justice.
Contradictory Behavior
While claiming to stand for transparency and responsibility, those same individuals proceeded to undermine the server’s operations from the inside out. This behavior raised serious questions about their actual intentions.
Heroes and true leaders depart with dignity. They ensure smooth transitions. They don’t disable tools and delete community infrastructure on their way out.
On Simon’s Role
Simon is called out here specifically because:
He attempted to cast himself as a moral guardian, while simultaneously taking steps that destabilized the community space.
Unlike Lilycat, who remained largely silent and non-confrontational, Simon was actively involved in the damage that followed his departure.
The Fallout
Simon’s exit was not graceful. Instead of leaving quietly or cooperatively, it appeared calculated to leave disruption in his wake. However, the result was not what he likely intended:
He left empty-handed. And the server moved forward — healthier and stronger than before.
What was framed as “exposing corruption” ended up being seen as a personal vendetta. The fallout didn’t bury the server. Instead, it undermined the credibility of those who initiated the conflict.
Contradictions in Claimed Principles
It’s important to highlight a recurring contradiction observed in the English-speaking side of the community. Publicly, it consistently promoted values of tolerance, inclusivity, and support for marginalized groups — presenting itself as a safe and welcoming space for all.
However, many actions taken by its leadership and moderation stood in direct opposition to those proclaimed ideals:
Censorship and selective punishment often targeted expressions that, ironically, were meant to question or critique unfair moderation.
Users who expressed dissent or supported banned individuals were met with penalties, despite the community’s stated commitment to open dialogue and expression.
This disconnect between values and execution led to rising frustration among users. Those who once respected the community’s message began to question its authenticity.
The Matter of Evidence
During the ongoing situation, a new screenshot was introduced mid-discussion — claimed to be “new,” but in reality, it was an older image, resurfaced and taken out of context.
The source of this was allegedly Simon, not the document’s other contributors.
This raised further concerns about selective framing and the deliberate misrepresentation of events to fit a narrative.
Last updated
